Nothing, As You Like It, Twelfth Night. Histories-King John; 1, 2, Henry IV; Henry V. 1601-1609. Comedies-Troilus and Cressida, Measure for Measure, Tragedies Julius Caesar, Hamlet, Othello, Macbeth, 1610-1613. Comedies-Cymbeline, Winter's Tale, Tempest, Two Histories-Henry VIII. (2) If Shakespeare were living today he would probably be a novelist. Living in the days of Queen Elizabeth, when the desire for activity was in the air, when people were fond of being abroad and of seeing and being seen, fond of dress and gaiety, and when popular education was low, he was a dramatist. He wrote plays because the drama was the chief source of amusement and education, and offered the best medium of expression. The drama of Shakespeare was the logical and complete result of the early history of the play, a development from the old Miracle and Morality plays organized and fostered by the church to enliven its services, then transferred to the town guilds, and later to traveling companies going from town to town. By the time of Shakespeare's arrival in London, several companies had been organized, and there was talk of abandoning the crude halls and building theatres. This process is an interesting study for which there is no occasion here. Suffice it to say that Shakespeare profited by this slow development, even going back to those masters of the craft, the Greeks. Particularly in his tragedies do we find clearly manifest the operation of dramatic principles, the application of the spirit of unities, at least, and a consistent application of the law of tragedy, that evil shall be punished and virtue rewarded. Moreover, Shakespeare continually re lies on the dominance of fate as an impelling cause in the destruction of evil-doers, and likewise preserves in comedy the play of obstacle and ambition which furnishes the content of real comedy. Shakespeare had the dramatic instinct. He loved the theatre as a means of national expression just as thoroughly as did the Greeks, and he believed it to be the best literary form to "hold the mirror up to nature." The playhouse itself was a crude affair, though Shakespeare improved the structure when he began to invest his money in them. It consisted of an irregularly-shaped building, open to the weather except over the stage. The stage echoed the Greek stage, in that it was a mere projection from one wall with a short curtain in the rear to permit the actors to effect entrances. The ground floor, without seats, was the cheaper portion, occupied by the "groundlings." About the theatre ran a gallery in which the better sort sat. There was no scenery and few properties. Female parts were acted by boys. Plays began at three o'clock and permitted intervals between the acts. It is clear, then, that the many scenes in each act of a Shakespearean play merely indicate the exit and entrance of characters, and do not indicate change of scenes. It is clear also that Shakespeare, like the Greeks, relied upon the acting, "the getting across" of the thought of his play by the eloquence of utterance and the fervor of dramatic presentation, rather than upon the artificial values of scenery, costume and properties. Some study of these matters should be the preparation of the student for a complete understanding of the plays of Shakespeare, indeed, for the plays of today. (3) The third topic which should be included in this consideration is the social conditions of the day. Students should know what were the pastimes and the sports of that day, the life of Queen Elizabeth's court, the rivalry of her courtiers, the verse making, the boat parties on the Thames, the political intrigues, the archery contests, the style of dress, the changes in architecture of homes due to new inventions, the many new products brought in by travel and commerce, the state of the church, the routes of the high roads, the robberinfested forests, the ignorance of the country people, the popular superstitions, and, by no means last, the conditions in London. He should know what portion constituted the old city, the location of the Tower, the great gates, the important streets, and the kind of houses on them. The bridges across the Thames, the bear-pits and theatres, and the Guild Halls, also throw light on the state of things in that day. A knowledge of these things as well as of the social temperament of the people the point of view of the dandy as well as of the ruffian or of the scholar and churchman-explain many a passage in the plays. An insight into the standards of morality of that time, of the social and criminal laws, of the attitude toward God, likewise explain many a reference. To get the atmosphere of Shakespeare's plays some reading of this background must be made. But deeper than mere atmosphere lies dramatic structure. In the first place, the student must differentiate clearly between drama and story. Drama may be called story in action, but many plays fail, not because the idea was uninteresting or the acting poor, but because the story was not treated dramatically. Action does not mean mere business, mere movement on the stage; action means the translation into human action of information, motives, impulses, concepts. As soon as a play becomes mere relation, mere discussion and analysis of motives and persons, or of matter "off stage," it ceases to be drama and becomes story. The plays of Shakespeare, while apparently "talky," are singularly free from story, as such, and truly dramatic. Students should be able to trace the operation of this fundamental law through the plays studied. By so doing they get at the essence of drama,— a portrayal of life. They should be able to ascertain the idea back of every play, to be able to formulate it into a proposition as if they were proving a theorem in geometry. In tragedy they should analyze the elements of the struggle involved, and in comedy the force of the obstacles. They should be able to grasp the forces which make the denouement of the play. A play, then, presupposes certain divisions. There is the "Introduction," which usually covers the first act and which serves to introduce the main characters, to suggest the idea of the play, and to shape it into some sort of a proposition, as well as to record that needed information of past events precedent to the opening of the play without which we would move in the dark. Then comes the "Rising action," a process which extends to about the middle of the third act, a section treating of the actual events, deeds, or statements which set agoing the actual performance of the main characters. As the third act approaches, there are evidences of obstacles in the way, though when the "Turning point" is reached, the deed is accomplished because of which the play is written. But herein lies the essence of tragedy. Evil-doers may succeed, and if the play should then end, the play would be immoral; indeed, life would not be worth living. But there is always retribution. Evil-doers cannot escape the consequences of their own acts, and whereas those obstacles in their way were, during the "Rising action," only "as small as a hand," they now, during the "Falling action," become "huge clouds," and by the fifth act of the play overwhelm the miscreant. With the conclusion of this act of retribution comes the "Climax" of the play, a term not to be confused with the "Turning point." It may be synonymous with the actual ending of the play, but if some time is needed to unravel the strands of the play, the last act of the play may be termed "Denouement." All plays, ancient or modern, must be subject to this test to determine whether they are dramatically correct. The student, then, should approach the study of Shakespeare from this point of view. Let him first put himself back into the Elizabethan atmosphere. Let him feel the same interest in a story as they felt, and sharpen his senses to see, feel and hear the wonderful new evidences of an expanding world. Let him realize that in the space of a few hours is to be portrayed by work, act, gesture, grimace, and even silence, what the novelist needs hundreds of pages to tell. He must know, then, that a play needs close and long study to extract all this from a bald text. Examine all the characters first, and note their stations in life and their traits. See if their future acts bear out first impressions. Carrying in mind the dramatic structure outlined above, study the text for setting, contrasts in dialogue, poetic subtleties, moral judgments, character development, and all the evidences of rare personalities hidden behind word and stage direction. Form the habit of constantly summarizing lines and scenes, so as to be able to hit off their significance instantly and to give them proper classification in the context. Memorize passages; recite whole scenes in dialogue before the class; and, what is equally as useful, let the student try his hand at dramatization of those aspects of life suggested either by the text itself or by the records of Elizabethan life. At least two readings of the play should be given, the first straight through for the larger elements touched upon, and then again for details. A scholarly edited text should contain enough matter to throw light on the forces which make up the play, some insight into the characters, and such notes as explain all obscure or archaic expressions. The peculiarities of Shakespeare's verse, such as his contracted words, expanded syllables, "run-on" and "end-stopped" lines, and the elements of the metre of his verse should have some place. But these matters should never be made the main purpose of the study. The main purpose in the study of Shakespeare is to seek out those universal truths which link the present with the past, and which, for us in America, bind us to that great English heritage which is ours. More than that, by his stories drawn from the great past of all ages, by his varied characters, and |